Copyright was established to *encourage* production of intellectual or creative works such that ultimately society as a whole benefits. The carrot to producers of such works was a limited ability to make money through sales of copies. Where does the original intent of copyright say that your son is entitled to make money off your creation? If your son simply inherits your works, where is his incentive to produce? Where is the benefit to society?
Unlike your rented house, which is a non-copyable physical asset occupying a defined space your book/parent's books are trivially copied and can be transferred and stored anywhere. Why would society want to keep limitations on dissemination of a work when the original creator of that work has passed away and no longer requires an incentive to produce?
interesting that you consider the price of the produced electricity as the measure of what is best...do these figures include the impact on the environment? the exposure to the public to potentially dangerous wastes? please don't use money as the *only* metric to measure by thats how we end up in energy and environmental crisis
Re:Games in the Windows VM?
on
Phoenix BIOSOS?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
ummm that was my point.
Traditionally there is a BIOS which provides low level hardware access to a host OS which can then run a guest VM.
With Hyperspace the line between the BIOS and the host OS are blurred...
Does the guest Windows VM (it's running on a hypervisor) get low level access to the hardware?
If it does then gaming should work fine but it would be unlikely that multiple guests could be run simultaneously.
The OLPC guys may just be being pragmatic. If they don't partner up with Microsoft and work together to sell laptops to developing countries they will have to compete against Microsoft. From memory there have already been instances where an Intel/Microsoft alliance has already "out competed" OLPC bids in Africa. Competing against Microsoft to get laptops to kids is not something the OPLC guys may able to do.
I can sustain about 270-300W for an hour and about 210W for 3 hours - measured using a PowerTap. On average I ride about 200kms/wk but I'm no serious (racing) cyclist, just a "get fit" kinda guy. So no I don't think superhuman is required.
The standard lane change technique for a car taught in Australia goes:
-Check mirrors -Indicate -Shoulder check (blind spot check, turn to look over your shoulder down the drivers side of the vehicle) -Go if clear
The idea is you indicate even if your blind spot is not clear, you are trying to change lanes so any vehicle in your blind spot needs to know that to adjust their position (either forwards or backwards). If you check your blind spot and it is not clear the indicators let the other driver know what you are trying to achieve.
So why mirror check before indicating? Essentially if you see something in the mirror that says you aren't going to be able to change lanes now (for example some galah approaching at speed trying to overtake you), you don't cause them to react in a possibly dangerous way (heavy braking, swerving).
Obviously the way you act has to adapt to the circumstance. In heavy traffic, your mirror check will always say the way is not clear but you indicate anyway, again to inform other drivers that you wish to change lanes, hopefully they will adjust to allow it. The shoulder check then serves as your final check before committing to the maneuver.
Now lets start a flamewar on the correct way to indicate at roundabouts:)
Having spent time as a phone support person for a small ISP I can tell you there is definitely value in repeating steps that the user says they have performed. Many calls I received for help would go something like:
User: I tried doing x, y and z ands it still doesn't work. Me: Ok, could you do just x for me and tell me exactly what you see. User: But I've already done x and it doesn't work. Me: Please could you just try it for me again. User: Oh it's working now...why didn't it work before. (this happened more than 50% of the time)
or
User: *Reads error message or describes window/screen appearance* Me: Ok, I have a better understanding of the problem, instead of doing y, let's try do w now.
In the first case the user says they have done a series of tests (and I don't doubt they have), but often they perform steps in a slightly different order than you have them repeat and it is the order that is important.
As a tech you are walking the user through your thought process for testing and trouble shooting. If you can't build a mental map of the problem and visualize what is happening on their screen you are going to struggle to resolve their problem. Getting them to repeat steps they have already tried and describing exactly what they see is extremely important for building that mental map. Often what the user says happened isn't exactly what did happen (slight misreading of an error message for example, understandable if they have tried lots of things).
When a more knowledgeable user calls and describes, in detail, steps they have performed you can make a judgment call on whether the repetition is necessary. Knowing which users *are* knowledgeable vs just arrogant is something that only comes with experience, if in doubt have them repeat the steps they've tried (this is actually more painful as the support person as you cop abuse for making them do it).
Sure it is infuriating when you know retrying something won't work but it is very helpful to the support person, they are not always just following a script.
Phone support is *hard* and undervalued in many industries. I don't work in phone support anymore. When I call any phone support line now, I patiently do what the support person asks because I know they are *trying* to help and may pick up on stuff I missed.
Anyone know what bandwidth would be needed to run your monitor over USB? It would be nice if you could buy a PC with only USB ports (no serial, parallel, PS/2 etc) it would make setup and support so much easier.
Many students who would be failing the core curriculum - Maths, English, Science, Humanities would be the ones that excelled at Art, Music, Theatre, Manual arts (shop for those of you in the US).
Which subjects count in the "test" for good grades?
From my experience the entire education system places too much emphasis on test/exam results which are more a test of a students ability to memorize and regurgitate than on engagement in discussion, display of reasoning, assignments etc.
Having said that I do like the idea of discounts for achievement. Motivating kids to work hard for a reward seems to be lacking at the moment.
People have this perception that if your DNA is found at the scene or on the victim then you are 100% guilty. If you give your spouse a loving kiss and hug the morning that they get murdered by someone else, guess what, your DNA will be found on the body. If I follow you for a day I'm sure I could find an object you have touched that will contain enough trace DNA for me to amplify the quantity using basic kitchen equipment to the point where I could plant your DNA at a crime scene. DNA can be planted, much more easily that fingerprints and people think DNA evidence is bulletproof.
DNA is useful, but I think it is dangerous to use it as 100% proof. Sure the likelihood of DNA being planted at a crime scene is probably quite low right now but I can see it becoming widespread if there is a national DNA database. This puts the police back to square one while costing a lot of money and exposing the general population to abuse of their genetic information in the future.
Re:Emphasis on the light, please.
on
Vertical Farming
·
· Score: 1
How about transparent (glass) floors? Put the high light requiring plants higher up. Sure you will lose light the "deeper" you go but should reduce artifical light production.
The thing is, is that you are either with us...or you are with the terrorists.
Just joking. I'm sure that is not exactly what Bush said, though I find he does have an odd spoken grammar (if there is such a thing). Perhaps that is where people are taking their cues from?
With the cost of fuel as a major operating factor I can see the merit of your volume/efficiency arguements. However, if the fuel cost is removed the need to go larger becomes less important. A fleet of smaller ships could be used to service an equivalent delivery volume.
Pros: - Less draft (more available ports, berths) - A fleet will have a higher availability than a single ship wrt dry docking/maintenance - Smaller capacity ships means faster loading times in port (greater flexibility to take advantage of weather windows this is of great interest to LNG operastors).
Cons: - More ships means more maintenance - Higher costs of construction (I guess) - Longer journey times - not so bad for non-perishable goods. - More ships means more traffic and a higher likelihood of a collision - More shipments means more administrative overhead
*Puts on imagination cap*
If they get the technology to a useful level, imagine a global fleet of smaller autonomous vessels using GPS for navigation providing the majority of the non-perishable haulage.
I have also used the Java-VNC solution successfully quite a few times. The only caveat I'd put on it is you should get each remote site to make a test connection prior to the *real* presentation. Many companies now firewall the appropriate ports so their employees can run the viewer but it can't connect.
which includes a description of the Japanses kei cars. This is a brilliant example of a government recognising a problem that will not be solved by the market alone (everyone buying SUV's) and creating through legislation a competitive advantage to those willing to be more fuel efficient and drive smaller cars.
The devastation from a bomb is easier to gauge and to some extent you can control who gets hurt.
Once a virus is released, you can't control who is eventually infected (aside from mass vaccinations, assuming you can make one).
Thus a bomb is more useful to a terrorist in that they can hit hard at their intended target without risking much damage to those the purport to be fighting for.
Both fingerprint and DNA evidence can be faked. As you stated, we shed DNA all the time, thus is would be trivial for someone to harvest some of yours. Once a DNA sample has been obtained it can easily be amplified using PCR and other techniques in a standard household kitchen. The DNA sampler could then spike any location with copious quanitites of your DNA, making you appear to have spent quite some time there. Now you have to work hard to prove you were somewhere else at the time.
A few years ago, the above senario would have been quite a stretch. Today, it is entirely plausible. DNA evidence should not be held in such high regard anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright was established to *encourage* production of intellectual or creative works such that ultimately society as a whole benefits. The carrot to producers of such works was a limited ability to make money through sales of copies. Where does the original intent of copyright say that your son is entitled to make money off your creation? If your son simply inherits your works, where is his incentive to produce? Where is the benefit to society?
Unlike your rented house, which is a non-copyable physical asset occupying a defined space your book/parent's books are trivially copied and can be transferred and stored anywhere. Why would society want to keep limitations on dissemination of a work when the original creator of that work has passed away and no longer requires an incentive to produce?
interesting that you consider the price of the produced electricity as the measure of what is best...do these figures include the impact on the environment? the exposure to the public to potentially dangerous wastes? please don't use money as the *only* metric to measure by thats how we end up in energy and environmental crisis
ummm that was my point.
Traditionally there is a BIOS which provides low level hardware access to a host OS which can then run a guest VM.
With Hyperspace the line between the BIOS and the host OS are blurred...
Does the guest Windows VM (it's running on a hypervisor) get low level access to the hardware?
If it does then gaming should work fine but it would be unlikely that multiple guests could be run simultaneously.
If the Windows OS is running in a VM does it get low level access to the video card for gaming? If not then they have lost the gaming market...
Haven't really looked at Chrome but I'd assume each process (tab) would still be looking at a centralised cookie cache.
Perhaps it is time to have a dedicated banking browser? One that does not use cookies/cache data/allow more that one tab etc etc
The OLPC guys may just be being pragmatic. If they don't partner up with Microsoft and work together to sell laptops to developing countries they will have to compete against Microsoft. From memory there have already been instances where an Intel/Microsoft alliance has already "out competed" OLPC bids in Africa. Competing against Microsoft to get laptops to kids is not something the OPLC guys may able to do.
another possibility:
http://www.amazon.com/Doomsday-Effect-Thomas-Wren/dp/0671655795/
I can sustain about 270-300W for an hour and about 210W for 3 hours - measured using a PowerTap. On average I ride about 200kms/wk but I'm no serious (racing) cyclist, just a "get fit" kinda guy. So no I don't think superhuman is required.
I suspect the metagame is really to see if they can get lots of people to watch their crap. If you watched the video, you were "gamed"
The standard lane change technique for a car taught in Australia goes:
:)
-Check mirrors
-Indicate
-Shoulder check (blind spot check, turn to look over your shoulder down the drivers side of the vehicle)
-Go if clear
The idea is you indicate even if your blind spot is not clear, you are trying to change lanes so any vehicle in your blind spot needs to know that to adjust their position (either forwards or backwards). If you check your blind spot and it is not clear the indicators let the other driver know what you are trying to achieve.
So why mirror check before indicating? Essentially if you see something in the mirror that says you aren't going to be able to change lanes now (for example some galah approaching at speed trying to overtake you), you don't cause them to react in a possibly dangerous way (heavy braking, swerving).
Obviously the way you act has to adapt to the circumstance. In heavy traffic, your mirror check will always say the way is not clear but you indicate anyway, again to inform other drivers that you wish to change lanes, hopefully they will adjust to allow it. The shoulder check then serves as your final check before committing to the maneuver.
Now lets start a flamewar on the correct way to indicate at roundabouts
Having spent time as a phone support person for a small ISP I can tell you there is definitely value in repeating steps that the user says they have performed. Many calls I received for help would go something like:
User: I tried doing x, y and z ands it still doesn't work.
Me: Ok, could you do just x for me and tell me exactly what you see.
User: But I've already done x and it doesn't work.
Me: Please could you just try it for me again.
User: Oh it's working now...why didn't it work before. (this happened more than 50% of the time)
or
User: *Reads error message or describes window/screen appearance*
Me: Ok, I have a better understanding of the problem, instead of doing y, let's try do w now.
In the first case the user says they have done a series of tests (and I don't doubt they have), but often they perform steps in a slightly different order than you have them repeat and it is the order that is important.
As a tech you are walking the user through your thought process for testing and trouble shooting. If you can't build a mental map of the problem and visualize what is happening on their screen you are going to struggle to resolve their problem. Getting them to repeat steps they have already tried and describing exactly what they see is extremely important for building that mental map. Often what the user says happened isn't exactly what did happen (slight misreading of an error message for example, understandable if they have tried lots of things).
When a more knowledgeable user calls and describes, in detail, steps they have performed you can make a judgment call on whether the repetition is necessary. Knowing which users *are* knowledgeable vs just arrogant is something that only comes with experience, if in doubt have them repeat the steps they've tried (this is actually more painful as the support person as you cop abuse for making them do it).
Sure it is infuriating when you know retrying something won't work but it is very helpful to the support person, they are not always just following a script.
Phone support is *hard* and undervalued in many industries. I don't work in phone support anymore. When I call any phone support line now, I patiently do what the support person asks because I know they are *trying* to help and may pick up on stuff I missed.
Anyone know what bandwidth would be needed to run your monitor over USB? It would be nice if you could buy a PC with only USB ports (no serial, parallel, PS/2 etc) it would make setup and support so much easier.
You are bang on the mark here.
Many students who would be failing the core curriculum - Maths, English, Science, Humanities would be the ones that excelled at Art, Music, Theatre, Manual arts (shop for those of you in the US).
Which subjects count in the "test" for good grades?
From my experience the entire education system places too much emphasis on test/exam results which are more a test of a students ability to memorize and regurgitate than on engagement in discussion, display of reasoning, assignments etc.
Having said that I do like the idea of discounts for achievement. Motivating kids to work hard for a reward seems to be lacking at the moment.
People have this perception that if your DNA is found at the scene or on the victim then you are 100% guilty. If you give your spouse a loving kiss and hug the morning that they get murdered by someone else, guess what, your DNA will be found on the body. If I follow you for a day I'm sure I could find an object you have touched that will contain enough trace DNA for me to amplify the quantity using basic kitchen equipment to the point where I could plant your DNA at a crime scene. DNA can be planted, much more easily that fingerprints and people think DNA evidence is bulletproof.
DNA is useful, but I think it is dangerous to use it as 100% proof. Sure the likelihood of DNA being planted at a crime scene is probably quite low right now but I can see it becoming widespread if there is a national DNA database. This puts the police back to square one while costing a lot of money and exposing the general population to abuse of their genetic information in the future.
Seriously dumb idea.
sounds to me like the terrorists have won then...
How about transparent (glass) floors? Put the high light requiring plants higher up. Sure you will lose light the "deeper" you go but should reduce artifical light production.
The thing is, is that you are either with us...or you are with the terrorists.
Just joking. I'm sure that is not exactly what Bush said, though I find he does have an odd spoken grammar (if there is such a thing). Perhaps that is where people are taking their cues from?
so should we expect a phytoplankton bloom?
how would such a bloom impact on the rest of the ecosystem?
With the cost of fuel as a major operating factor I can see the merit of your volume/efficiency arguements. However, if the fuel cost is removed the need to go larger becomes less important. A fleet of smaller ships could be used to service an equivalent delivery volume.
Pros:
- Less draft (more available ports, berths)
- A fleet will have a higher availability than a single ship wrt dry docking/maintenance
- Smaller capacity ships means faster loading times in port (greater flexibility to take advantage of weather windows this is of great interest to LNG operastors).
Cons:
- More ships means more maintenance
- Higher costs of construction (I guess)
- Longer journey times - not so bad for non-perishable goods.
- More ships means more traffic and a higher likelihood of a collision
- More shipments means more administrative overhead
*Puts on imagination cap*
If they get the technology to a useful level, imagine a global fleet of smaller autonomous vessels using GPS for navigation providing the majority of the non-perishable haulage.
I have also used the Java-VNC solution successfully quite a few times. The only caveat I'd put on it is you should get each remote site to make a test connection prior to the *real* presentation. Many companies now firewall the appropriate ports so their employees can run the viewer but it can't connect.
Have a read of the following:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/apr06/3173/3
which includes a description of the Japanses kei cars. This is a brilliant example of a government recognising a problem that will not be solved by the market alone (everyone buying SUV's) and creating through legislation a competitive advantage to those willing to be more fuel efficient and drive smaller cars.
correct, no large carnivores, just lots of small omnivorous marsupials that could make short work of a carcass within a couple of days.
The devastation from a bomb is easier to gauge and to some extent you can control who gets hurt.
Once a virus is released, you can't control who is eventually infected (aside from mass vaccinations, assuming you can make one).
Thus a bomb is more useful to a terrorist in that they can hit hard at their intended target without risking much damage to those the purport to be fighting for.
Both fingerprint and DNA evidence can be faked. As you stated, we shed DNA all the time, thus is would be trivial for someone to harvest some of yours. Once a DNA sample has been obtained it can easily be amplified using PCR and other techniques in a standard household kitchen. The DNA sampler could then spike any location with copious quanitites of your DNA, making you appear to have spent quite some time there. Now you have to work hard to prove you were somewhere else at the time.
A few years ago, the above senario would have been quite a stretch. Today, it is entirely plausible. DNA evidence should not be held in such high regard anymore.